Erik Jones wrote:
>
> On Nov 14, 2007, at 10:44 AM, Mike Charnoky wrote:
>
>> In this usage scenario, doesn't the new HOT (heap only tuples) feature
>> of PG8.3 help, in terms of the DB requiring less VACUUM maintenance?
>>
>> I am similarly performing a huge number of inserts, followed by a huge
>
On Nov 14, 2007, at 10:44 AM, Mike Charnoky wrote:
In this usage scenario, doesn't the new HOT (heap only tuples) feature
of PG8.3 help, in terms of the DB requiring less VACUUM maintenance?
I am similarly performing a huge number of inserts, followed by a huge
number of updates to fill in a f
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:44:55AM -0500, Mike Charnoky wrote:
> In this usage scenario, doesn't the new HOT (heap only tuples) feature
> of PG8.3 help, in terms of the DB requiring less VACUUM maintenance?
It should, yes. We'll probably know more once 8.3 is in the field. For new
work, though,
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:31:11AM -0500, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
> Thanks for the advanced warning about problems with vaccuum !
Note this isn't a _problem_ with vacuum, exactly, it's just the set of
compromises that PostgreSQL has settled on. There are other ways of
cleaning up the system ("defra
In this usage scenario, doesn't the new HOT (heap only tuples) feature
of PG8.3 help, in terms of the DB requiring less VACUUM maintenance?
I am similarly performing a huge number of inserts, followed by a huge
number of updates to fill in a few null fields. The data is indexed by
insert time. M
load.
Thanks for the advanced warning about problems with vaccuum !
-dave
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 11:13 AM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] reserving space
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:28:30AM -0500, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
> null. My concern has to do with record fragmentation at the time of
> update because there's no room to "expand" them to accept the non-null
> data. (BTW, the columns are floating point).
You have a mistaken idea about how this w
On Nov 14, 2007 9:28 AM, Gauthier, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi:
>
> I have a situation where I will be inserting thousands of records into a
> table but leaving 2 of it's columns null. Later on, I will be updating most
> of those records and putting real values in place of those 2 null
